Mexican Consul "It's ours and will be again."

Mexican Consulate spokesman, Alberto Lozano, tells a group of Americans in front of the Mexican consulate on March 13th, 2008 at 11am, that this country "has been and will be Mexico."

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• Mexican
• consulate
• news
• alberto
• lozano
• America
• spokesman
• illegal
• immigration

[russelelane]

NAFTA has ruined small Mexican farmers who couldn't compete with big US agribusinesses corn imports. The same with small Mexican businesses--I know of 2 first hand. That caused an increase of illegal immigration too.

[bravovalle]

Actually it was part of mexico. Emperor Agustín I of Mexico gave permission to Austin and Houston to bring americans to the northern territories of mexico under these conditions; 1) to free their black slaves (slavery was illigal in mexico) 2) to convert to catholisism (obbligated religion in mexico). Instead, they started the so called texas revolution with the help of the usa, proclamed a republic and later joined USA. That triggered the mexivan american war years later.

[jamesellis33]

I have nothing against the way people look, but fuck mexico. Its stupid to pay homage to anywhere but the country you live in today and now. Fuck the past and fuck ancestors there is a reason a person leaves their country because its was a shit hole. Pls people don't be traitors.

[Cosmo1093]

@AguilaComandanteDGO The fact that they conquered so much of the world has to attest to something. They still had the means to "steal" ideas and innovations through trade or the superiority to attain them by conquering people groups. Even if they stole ideas, they did still improve or innovate on such ideas.. I'm not saying your people didn't achieve great things, but from an objective standpoint as being neither European or Latin American, Europe was still more advanced....

[Cosmo1093]

@AguilaComandanteDGO Even Americans bathed daily since the 1800's.. Roman aqueducts are still standing, but Italy, along with the rest of (western) Europe has advanced to the point where they don't need to use such aqueducts anymore..and most civilizations of the time had aqueducts too, but none like the system Romans had. Oh, and even Americans bathed daily during the 1800's.

[Cosmo1093]

@AguilaComandanteDGO Having elections doesn't necessarily mean its a democracy. The Athenians established what is regarded as the first democracy in 507BC.

The Romans still improved and advanced their engineering and architecture to previously unforeseen heights. Their aqueduct system wouldn't be surpassed for 1000 years - their water usage per capita is on par with modern NYC. Many of their bridges and roads are still used to this day. Those feats are impressive, even by modern standards.

[Cosmo1093]

@AguilaComandanteDGO Ok, the Greeks and Romans had more advantages, so what? Should they not have utilized such advantages? That also doesn't change the fact that they were still more advanced. And I'd say the Greek creation of Democracy is pretty original and damn innovative for their time. Militarily, they were easily the best for their time. The Greek model of the phalanx is pretty original too, as is the 3-line Roman Legion. Roman engineers/architects were also the best of their time.

[Cosmo1093]

@AguilaComandanteDGO (continued) Really? Because wheeled vehicles dating back to the 4th Millennium BCE have been found in Mesopotamia and Central Europe. That's long before Mexicans existed...you know..since Mexico only came about as a country in 1821...and how the majority of Mexicans are Mestizos. Aside from the clear logical flaw, the only use of the wheel for the Olmec was for children's toys...and that's hardly innovative if it never was put to actual use to advance civilization.

[Cosmo1093]

@AguilaComandanteDGO It makes no difference how civilizations developed or integrated technological advancements, in the end, the Greeks and Romans were still more advanced. Trade and cultural exchanges are one of many methods used to advance civilizations. Oh, and math developed by Greek mathematicians such as Euclid, Archimedes, Aristotle, and Pythagoras are still used to this very day.

The Aztecs never even reached the Bronze or Iron Ages due to their lack of such resources.

[Cosmo1093]

@AguilaComandanteDGO Really? Is that why they were technologically inferior and still practiced human sacrifices? The Aztec records say they sacrificed 84,000 prisoners in 4 days. They may have achieved great things, but the fact is that all it took was a 530 Conquistadors and 1000 Tlaxcalans to bring down the Aztec Empire, which had 15 million citizens. As for the Inca, it only took 180 Europeans.

I'd say the Romans were easily more advanced. The ancient Greeks were too.

[Cosmo1093]

@AguilaComandanteDGO (cont) Oh, and the Inca and Aztec did use warfare to conquer smaller tribes around them, that's how they became empires. That's no better than Europeans, the only difference is that Europeans were more successful and went further. China's many dynasties conquered with force too. How come you don't condemn any of their actions? You can go ahead and hate on Europeans all you want, it doesn't even bother me considering how I have absolutely no European/white blood in me at all.

[Cosmo1093]

@AguilaComandanteDGO No, Easter is a holiday. I never said Europe was more advanced than China in 1492, I said it was more advanced than the pre-colonial Americas, you illiterate, blithering idiot. The Inca and Aztecs must have been very advanced in order to be conquered by relatively small numbers of Spanish Conquistadors, right?

You don't find things like human sacrificing and mutilation barbaric or savage? You act like tribes didn't fight amongst themselves before Europeans anyway.